Leonard v. C R Bard Inc ( 2020 )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION No. 5:20-cv-443-BO MARIE LEONARD, ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) Vv, ) ORDER ) C.R. BARD, INC. and BARD ) PERIPHERAL VASCULAR, INC, ) ) Defendants. ) This matter is before the Court on the parties’ joint motion [DE 38] to stay discovery and all pretrial deadlines. A district court has inherent authority to manage its docket to promote “economy of time and effort for itself, counsel, and for litigants.” Landis v. N. Am. Co., 299 U.S. 248, 254-55 (1936). When determining whether to stay proceedings, a district court generally considers “(1) the interests of judicial economy; (2) hardship and equity to the moving party if the action is not stayed; and (3) potential prejudice to the non-moving party.” Johnson v. DePuy Orthopaedics, No. 3:12-CV-2274-JFA, 2012 WL 4538642, at *2 (D.S.C. Oct. 1, 2012) (citation omitted). The Court, having considered these factors, finds that a stay is warranted. Accordingly, the motion to stay discovery and all pretrial deadlines [DE 38] is GRANTED. This action is STAYED for ninety days after the entry of the order while parties pursue settlement discussions. SO ORDERED, this Ye day of November, 2020. aa aT et. W. BOYL CHIEF UNITED STATES D{STRICT JUDGE